JeremyI'm not a particular fan of CVC, nor do I have a clue how much money has been spent over the last Olympic cycle on athletics.

But one thing seems fairly clear to me. The British team is stronger and healthier, with far more talented youngsters coming through, than it was before Beijing. No reference to 'placings tables' will change my view of what I have seen this year. It has been good on the number of records set, and good from a perspective of more strength across a wider range of events.Its potentially the best British team for a long, long time, and in my view it will get better in the next few years.

Whether that is because of (or despite) UKA , I have no idea. But no way have we gone backwards . When the next major champs roll around we will boast two reigning world champions and three Olympic champions.Five different athletes. You can call me a 'flag waver', or suggest I'm looking through rose-tinted glasses, I dont care... I'm saying what I see.

I am not defending UKA when I say this I am merely pointing out a very basic fact. Spouting on about £25m spent since Beijing is completely and utterly irrelevant. Therelevant figure is how much EXTRA was spent when compared to the 4 years to Beijing. If you are going to look at marginal return you MUST compare it to marginal cost.